IF Bush Said This, He SHOULD be Impeached!

Published on December 12, 2005 By Gideon MacLeish In Politics

I must preface this article with the fact that this link (a clearly left wing website) is the only place where I found this information. But I feel that the "facts" should at least be investigated.

According to the linked article above (read the disclaimer, please), when Bush was confronted with renewing the US Patriot Act, said the Constitution was "just a G__D___ piece of paper". The article goes on to allege similarly egregious statements from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

The problem is, I can't find substantiation for this comment. The writer for "capitol hill blue" has considered himself an unimpeachable source and appears to have done so again. If this comment was made, it apparently even escaped the detection of the Libertarian Party (I am hard pressed to believe that the LP would overlook one hell of a sound bite for the midterm elections).

I believe that this allegation should be investigated, to be sure. But the notable lack of evidence, or even a single name to substantiate the claim makes this yellow journalism at its finest, a practice that seems to have become all too common among some members of the media.

If you have access to EVIDENCE of this comment, please email it to me at: gideon.macleish@gmail.com. I'd love to do a follow up. But without some pretty hard evidence, I'm not running with this story.

Comments (Page 1)

Island Dog

on Dec 12, 2005

That website is common for radical accusations against the President. If he did say something like that the MSM would be all over it.

Dr Guy

on Dec 12, 2005

One problem with it, is that it does not sound like Bush. That does automatically negate it, but as ID said, if he had said it, the MSM would have been all over like stink on poop.

Gideon MacLeish

on Dec 12, 2005

One problem with it, is that it does not sound like Bush. That does automatically negate it, but as ID said, if he had said it, the MSM would have been all over like stink on poop.

Dr. Guy,

Which is why the article is loaded with qualifiers. Frankly, even if the MSM wasn't all over it, I assure you, the LP would be. We're pretty good at picking up those sorts of things. But no such quote appears on the website itself or in my party publications.

I frankly hesitated before posting the article at all. But if the evidence is there, I'd love to have it, and I WILL run it.

Dr Guy

on Dec 12, 2005

I frankly hesitated before posting the article at all. But if the evidence is there, I'd love to have it, and I WILL run it.

I have no problems with this article. And like you, IF he did say it, he has a lot of 'splaining' to do.

Leauki

on Dec 12, 2005

It sounds like something he might say in private, or when he thinks the mike is off.

I wouldn't worry about it. The UK and other Commonwealth realms has had prime ministers who doubted the monarchy!

Moderateman

on Dec 12, 2005

Gid, as you know a president can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, saying {if he said it and I doubt it} that the constitution is just a peice of paper, so what? it is just a peice of paper, the constitution is ideas, concepts, precepts and how things should be, and that's what makes it great.

Gideon MacLeish

on Dec 12, 2005

MM,

Did you read the story? IF what is alleged in the story is true, then what the president said is treasonous. Treason CERTAINLY counts as a high crime in any book, as it is the only federal crime that carries an automatic death penalty on conviction. But I don't believe he said it, frankly, without proof that is so far absent.

ParaTed2k

on Dec 12, 2005

What's pathetic, the left will probably take the one blog and run with it, no matter how unsubstantiated it is... but they trashed anyone who would mention rape and sexual assault accusations against Clinton that WERE substantiated.

You're right, if Prs. Bush did say it (even out of frustration), he needs to answer for it.. however, if he didn't then the guy running "Capitolhillblue.com" should have to answer for his libel.

Gideon MacLeish

on Dec 12, 2005

however, if he didn't then the guy running "Capitolhillblue.com" should have to answer for his libel.

I agree.

Island Dog

on Dec 12, 2005

This is the website that claims Bush is a "manic depressive".

Frankly, even if the MSM wasn't all over it, I assure you, the LP would be.

It's front page news when Bush says a word wrong. This would be breaking news everywhere.

Gideon MacLeish

on Dec 12, 2005

This would be breaking news everywhere.

I think it would be as well. But I'm still keeping my invite open to anyone who can send me the FACTS. I'd LOVE to scoop the MSM.

I won't hold my breath waiting for the facts to roll in, though

Zoomba

on Dec 12, 2005

I highly doubt this is true, but again if it was it would certainly be solid grounds to can him from the job.

Why? It's not a crime to say the constitution is garbage... Freedom of speech and all that great stuff. However, he did take an oath of office that mentions upholding the constitution. Saying it's garbage at that point places you in violation of an oath you took before God, and in this case more importantly, the chief justice of the supreme court. Breach of contract, failure to uphold duties sworn to uphold... THAT is why he would get his ass booted for a statement like that.

DJBandit

on Dec 12, 2005

And C.O.L. is not all over this one?

stevendedalus

on Dec 12, 2005

If Bush made the statement, he should certainly be impeached. It is an impossible conflict of interest for the standardbearer of the Constitution, the US president, to have such contempt for the Constitution. The problem is, the evidence just hasn't been provided Exactly and why you shouldn't froth over it. Even if he did say it in the heat of the moment, it obviously was in private, thus meaning nothing in the context of public character.

bakerstreet

on Dec 12, 2005

So what if he did say it?

It IS just a piece of paper. God didn't tell Moses to carve it into stone, it is a set of precepts that the founding fathers said could be amended and reinterpreted. I wonder what Jefferson would think about people pretending the document they wrote 200 years ago was some sort of untouchable holy edict.

I think you'll find that people who demand a precise, literalist, untouchable reading of the Constitution can abuse it as easy, and sometimes easier, than people who see it as a working model. In my opinion, accepting it for what it is is much better than the judges who wipe their asses with it each time they use it to legislate from the bench, inventing rights and overturning the will of the people.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!